Loss of simultaneity explained by classical physics

[Mentz114]

granpa,

the ability to ignore the speed of the ship is part of relativity. we are assuming a purely classical universe for this thought experiment.

Even in Gallilean relativity, a state of rest cannot be distinguished from a state of uniform motion.

 

[yuiop]

they would have seen a loss of simultaneity where there isn't any?

would a classical object moving through a classical universe experience a loss of simultaneity within its own body or not? its not clear what you are saying.

i believe it would.

Using classical assumptions, they probably would have predicted a loss of simultaneity within a moving body but they also would have have incorrectly predicted the speed of light is different for different observers.

I gave the example that in a Michelson Morley type experiment they would have predicted that a signal emmited from the centre of the two arms, when reflected off mirrors at the ends of the arms transverse and parallel to the motion of the apparatus, would not return simultaneously, whereas the experiment proved the the signals do return simultaneously. Hense "they would have seen a loss of simultaneity where there isn't any".

 

[granpa]

granpa,Even in Gallilean relativity, a state of rest cannot be distinguished from a state of uniform motion.

classically one has only to measure the speed of light to determine ones velocity.

 

[granpa]

Using classical assumptions, they probably would have predicted a loss of simultaneity within a moving body but they also would have have incorrectly predicted the speed of light is different for different observers.

I gave the example that in a Michelson Morley type experiment they would have predicted that a signal emmited from the centre of the two arms, when reflected off mirrors at the ends of the arms transverse and parallel to the motion of the apparatus, would not return simultaneously, whereas the experiment proved the the signals do return simultaneously. Hense "they would have seen a loss of simultaneity where there isn't any".

all i am trying to say is that loss if simultaneity can be explained classically. time dilation and length contraction can't as far as i know.

 

[yuiop]

classically one has only to measure the speed of light to determine ones velocity.

On the incorrect classical assumption that the speed of light would be different for different observers they probably would have incorrectly concluded that "one has only to measure the speed of light to determine ones velocity".

Classical physics largely assumed a static absolute medium that light propagated in, so it would not have been surprising if they incorreectly predicted a notion of absolute motion. If they had taken Gallileo a bit more seriously when he said there is nothing that can be measured in the closed moving cabin of a ship that would indicate your motion or lack of motion they might have come up with relativity as we know it sooner.

 

[granpa]

On the incorrect classical assumption that the speed of light would be different for different observers they probably would have incorrectly concluded


its not about what they would have concluded, its about what a hypothetical purely classical object in a hypothetical purely classical universe would do.